[packagers] [Fwd: Re: [users] perl-Test-Inline and perl-Test-Expect]

[Who Knows]

Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Who Knows wrote:
>
>   
>> Dag Wieers wrote: ( on the users lis
>>
>>     
>>>  The problem with older modules being shipped within the perl package is
>>>  something that dates back to Red Hat 5 and possibly earlier. Only since
>>>  recently, driven by Fedora, is Red Hat slowly releasing these modules.
>>>       
>> Well this explains some of the issues I have been dealing with since the
>> recent additions of perl-Module spec files.
>>
>> Do we want to standardize a way to deal with it such as the ExcludeDist
>> and ExclusiveDist tags? 
>> Or is it an endeavor best left to each packager?
>>     
>
> What kind of problems do you see exactly ? If they block yum or apt from 
> properly working, then yes we should use ExclusiveDist/ExcludeDist.
>
> Missing perl module dependencies is something we are working on and is 
> much a work in progress. In fact I have started to run repoclosure to get 
> rid of the remaining missing perl modules. Some of them cannot be done 
> though.
>
> --   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
> [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
>   
Perhaps then I am misunderstanding your comments about perl modules as 
part of the
base distribution.

For example I ran into an issue today on a fc4 build that required a 
newer version
of Getopt::Long. I was able to build the latest module perl-Getopt-Long, and
successfully installed it without yum conflict, but now the system has 
two versions.

[mochbuild at server lib]$ find /usr/lib/perl5 -name 'Long.pm' | grep Getopt
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.6/Getopt/Long.pm
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/Getopt/Long.pm

The original being version 2.34
The vender_perl from the new module is version 2.35

After reading your comments I thought I had erred in installing a 
vendor_perl module
when and existing base module was present?

Am I to assume if their are no yum conflicts ( there were not in the 
above case ) then
I am okay?

Thanks,
Jim